By Somnath Mukherji
Nationalism cannot be the last word. An evolving sense of justice can be. Justice cannot be sacrificed at the altar of nationalism. Nationalism has been used by the powers-to-be to get a section of the citizenry on board to carry out acts of aggression outside its boundaries and short circuiting justice inside. American aggression of Iraq or the declaration of Emergency in India are but some examples. Delicately tempered with a fear of insecurity nationalism allows people to create an opaque wall around the injustices of war, suspension of civil liberties or violation of human rights.
Today’s idea of nationalism is based on the Westphalian model of nation state that had gained roots in India in response to British colonialism. If one goes to the remote rural parts of India even today, this variety rabid urbane nationalism on display in the court premises of Delhi is missing. For, the lives of these people in rural India are bound by a shared area, natural resource, language, culture which is real and humanly palpable…to them it is their desh – and one has to live there and do certain things to belong to that desh. The new brand of nationalism is a much more dumbed down, easily attainable consumerist kind – you don’t have to live anywhere particular or perform any duties or even love the people of the nation, or make sacrifices for the nation to be called a nationalist. Love your cricket team, follow mainstream politics and ardently align yourself with the vision laid out by the government and be extremely sensitive about the security issues of the nation (not necessarily its people). If one is much more up to date on the skirmishes on the border with Pakistan than the number of farmers that have committed suicide in the last decade, one is a better nationalist. Questioning the government on it Marie-Antoinette-esque policies on the poor, talking about human rights, talking about the rights of adivasis and Dalits or the specter of ecological disaster staring at us, is a sure criteria for being branded as an anti-nationalist.
Section 124 (A) of the Indian Penal Code under which Kanhaiya has been booked, relates to the law of sedition that was designed by the British to prevent secession of India from the British empire. It was used against that ‘nationalists’ of that time – Tilak and Gandhi. It is ironic that the governments in independent India have used it much more enthusiastically than the colonizers themselves. Cartoonists, doctors, writers, singers, protestors and now student leaders have been booked under sedition law although in 1962 the Supreme Court had ruled that sedition should be used only if the act or words incite violence against the state and not just cause disaffection. If we were a progressive evolving society we would scrape this archaic colonial law which has been used unfairly to muzzle dissent.
The present brand of hyper nationalism is based on a negative relationship of enmity with the ‘other’ be it the minorities, a neighbouring country or hidden weapons of mass destruction. This nationalist identity cannot be constructed in absence of the ‘other’. The arrest of Kanhaiya, his public manhandling in the court premises is a clear signal to other dissenters and also a fuel to the hyper-masculine-nationalism to garner support in the urban middle and elite classes. What they might have underestimated is the power of injustice to mobilize forces of justice.
Tagore, the unwitting author of national anthems of 3 nation states – Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and India had written in his essay, “…and it is my conviction that my countrymen will gain truly their India by fighting against that education which teaches them that a country is greater than the ideals of humanity”.
Somnath is a Boston-based Indian activist.